Who writes and reviews the content on this site?

Nobody has reviewed it yet, and the site says so rather than implying otherwise. All 151 pages are drafts written against primary sources, every one of them is marked noindex and excluded from the sitemap, and no page names a reviewer because none has one. A page becomes indexable only when a person with a UAE tax credential has read it and signed it off.

How do you keep tax figures up to date?

Every rate, threshold, deadline and penalty on this site links to the authority that publishes it, usually the Federal Tax Authority or the Ministry of Finance. When those two disagree with us, they are right and we are out of date. Pages are re-checked whenever the FTA publishes a decision, guide or clarification that touches them.

No. Everything here is general guidance on published UAE tax law. It cannot account for your specific facts, and reading it does not create an adviser-client relationship. Where a question turns on your particular circumstances, that is exactly the point at which you should get advice rather than rely on a web page.

How do you decide what to write about?

From measured search demand rather than opinion. We harvested 3,157 real queries people type into Google in the UAE, and every page on this site exists because a cluster of those queries has no good answer. Pages with no measured demand behind them do not get written, because they would be padding.

Do you use AI to write the content?

Drafting is assisted. Verification is not: every figure is checked against a primary source before publication, and a credentialled human reviewer is the gate between a draft and a published page. We think the honest position is to tell you that rather than to imply a purely manual process.

How we work

Editorial standards

This is a tax reference. If it is wrong, someone files wrong. Everything below is a mechanism rather than a promise — most of it is enforced by the build, not by good intentions.

Every number is sourced

No rate, threshold, deadline or penalty appears on this site without a link to the body that publishes it — the Federal Tax Authority, the Ministry of Finance, or the Decree-Law or Cabinet Decision itself, cited by number.

Those links are not nofollow. Linking to the regulator you are writing about is a quality signal, and hoarding link equity from the FTA is not a strategy.

If a source and this site ever disagree, the source is right and this site is out of date. Tell us and we will fix it.

Nothing publishes without review

Every page carries a review status. A page is only indexable once a person with a UAE tax credential has read it and set that status to reviewed. Until then it is marked noindex and excluded from the sitemap.

This is enforced in code, not by process discipline. For the 151 guidance pages, the same function that decides whether a page appears in the sitemap decides whether it carries a noindex tag, so the two cannot drift apart — which is the usual way sitemaps start lying.

A handful of structural pages — the homepage, this one, the index and about — sit outside that mechanism because they are hand-written rather than generated, and they are not in the sitemap either. Saying so is cheaper than letting you discover it.

Current state of this site

Pages in the architecture: 151
Written: 151
Passing the quality gate: 151
Reviewed and published: 0
Awaiting credentialled review: 151

These figures are computed at build time from the site itself, not typed in by hand.

Right now that count is zero. Not one page on this site has been read and signed off by a credentialled reviewer, so every one of the 151 content pages carries noindex and the sitemap is empty. Where a page shows a review line, the date on it is the date the draft was last edited — it is not a record of a credentialled review, and until a reviewer exists it should not be read as one.

The quality gate

Thin pages are not a style problem on a tax site; they are the fastest way to lose the trust of both readers and search engines. So "no thin pages" is structural here rather than aspirational. Every page is checked at build time and fails if it does not clear:

a word floor set by page type — 2,200 for a regime overview, 1,500 for a topic page
a minimum number of substantive sections and answered questions
a 35–85 word opening answer that stands alone without surrounding context
at least one named legal instrument or authority
at least three contextual internal links and one primary external source
a title tag under 60 characters and a meta description between 110 and 158

A page that fails any of these is rendered but never indexed. It is not possible to ship a thin page through this site, only to fail to ship one.

The questions are real

The FAQs on every page are questions harvested from live Google results — what people genuinely asked, in their own words. We do not invent questions to pad structured data. A page with four real questions is worth more than one with twelve fabricated ones, and the fabricated version is spam.

The same applies to what gets written at all. Every page here exists because a measured cluster of real searches has no good answer. Where there is no demand, there is no page.

What we will not publish

Invented credibility. No fabricated client names, case studies, testimonials, review scores or "trusted by 500+ companies". This firm has no published track record yet, and writing one would be a lie.
Regulatory registers we do not hold. We link to the authority's own list rather than reproduce one we cannot verify or keep current.
Competitor brand names. We do not build pages to intercept searches for another firm by name.
Contact details we do not have. There is no phone number, office address or location claim on this site because there is not yet one to publish.
Manufactured urgency. No countdowns, no "3 people are viewing this". On a tax site that destroys the credibility it trades on.
Duplicate pages for the same question. One question gets one page, answered properly.
A regulatory status we do not hold. Nobody here is on the Federal Tax Authority's Tax Agent register or registered as an auditor, and no professional body membership or qualification is claimed for anyone. The terms of use set that out in full.
A reviewer nobody has. A page names a reviewer only once a credentialled person has actually read it. An editorial byline is not a substitute for one, and a build date is not a review date.

Corrections

Tax law changes and pages go stale. Where something on this site is wrong, out of date, or has been overtaken by an FTA clarification, we would rather hear about it than not.

There is no working route to tell us today. The question form at the foot of every page is not connected to a handler, so a submission is not sent, stored or read, and no email address or phone number is published on this site. Correcting that is the first thing on the list, and pretending otherwise on the page that promises corrections would be the worst possible place to do it.

When a page is materially corrected, its reviewed date changes. We do not bump review dates to look fresh; a date on this site means someone actually looked at the page on that day.